The article is saying that homes appear to be affordable due to the low interest rates. Once they go up, the affordability index goes down and mortgage-to-income ratios "may rise further to exceed their peak in 1997." It also goes to compare the age of the building now averaging 19.8 years compared to 10.8 years in 1997.

From what I can see the affordability in 1997 was itself out of line with historical affordability. So it is not that they are particularly affordable now just that they were VERY unaffordable in 1997. Also as the deposit required is now typically much higher than before the figures in the chart do not tell the whole story.

The average local HK'er with an average HK'er salary would not be able to afford the properties even now with the interest rates the way they are. Lets not forget that the majority of the population in HK make less than 12K a month.

And lets also not for get that the majority of those people get public housing...

There's working and there's working though. Many people here work incredibly hard and still cannot afford a tiny flat and having pretty much no welfare when they are too old, or sick, to work. Housing in HK is a stealth tax - and not a progressive one at that.